How to Change Someone's Opinion
I've heard a couple of philosophies where it's impossible to change someone else's opinion on something. The best you can hope to do is give people more knowledge, or a new way at looking things, or help people who are undecided on an issue. I can attest, that yes, changing someone else's opinion can be a very difficult thing. But it's not impossible. Why is it so hard? Because when someone's opinion changes, they admit implicitly that they were once wrong, whether it's about the latest movie or some political movement or religion. And being "in the wrong" can lead to once innocuous things being seen as mistakes. Those mistakes, depending on the issue, can have human consequences. I want you to meet Bob. Bob hates fuzzy dice. He wants fuzzy dice to be illegal. I want Bob to be more accepting of fuzzy dice. Step 1: See Where Bob is coming from This is probably the most important step in changing someone's opinion. You need to see the other side of the issue, and if fail to do so, you will never convince anyone of anything. Also, it's helpful to know the terminology and the issues that the other side has. If you understand someone else's side better than they do, you have an advantage. Bob wants fuzzy dice to be illegal because they caused his brother to die in a car crash. Bob is deeply hurt by the whole fuzzy dice vs. no fuzzy dice issue. Meanwhile, we've got Jim. Jim is an irresponsible moron. He got into another car crash with someone (his fault) and blamed them for crashing into him because they couldn't pay attention because of their fuzzy dice. Bob is hurt, and Jim is angry. When trying to change people's opinions on serious issues, you will come across these people. They both have investment in their side of the story for two vastly different reasons. You see, what some people like to do is use Jim's selfishness to dismiss Bob's plight. You don't want to do that, at all. If you come across someone like Jim... well, that's harder. Right now we're focusing on the Bobs of the world; not the Jims. By conflating the Bobs into the Jims, you make it a lot harder for the Bobs to see your side of the issue. Step 2: Know your own side of the issue. Your side of the issue doesn't have a Jim. It has a Chuck. Chuck is worse than Jim. You see, he wants to keep fuzzy dice legal because he's an insurance salesman and he can charge an extra premium when other people use fuzzy dice. Because he has a lot of money, he's the guy most notable for trying to keep fuzzy dice legal. You shouldn't like Chuck. When you get into an argument, expect Chuck to be brought up and have a clear rebuttal. If you want to affiliate yourself with a movement, you're going to end up affiliating yourself with crazies who find that movement to be appealing. This is any movement. Any philosophy. Any religion. In this case, it's about fuzzy dice. What do you do? Question advertisements, slogans, statistics from your own side. Do not just spout random numbers or percentages. You've got them memorized, but Bob has too. And so has Jim by the way. If you're using a stat that was manufactured by Chuck, then Bob isn't going to want to argue with you, and he has every right to refuse argument. In fact, it helps to find aspects of your opinion that you don't like. Chuck wants to get a law passed that makes fuzzy dice mandatory. You think that that's excessive. By opposing the fringe elements of your side and the crazies, directly, you make yourself look better. Also, you need to call out Chucks specifically when you come across them. Not just "I'm not like the insurance-dicers." Know your absolutes. What, to you, is absolute fact about said issue? When arguing stay the fuck away from them. You may think that you have the advantage. If this was debate class, sure. But we're trying to change people's opinions right now. Also, this should go without saying: try not to fall into the negative stereotypes of your argument, even in jest. They really don't help. Step 3: Engage Bob in Argument Okay, now that we have our ammo. It's time to fight! Except... a fight is the last thing you want. If you come at someone aggressively, you will lose. If you come at someone judgmentally, you will lose. No one wants to listen to someone holier than thou, and no one wants to be yelled at for something they believe in. It's best to engage Bob on his terms, or at best, neutral terms. However, make sure it's a term in which you can't be dismissed. Yes, you will probably get interference, but Bob has no reason to listen to you. He's already made up his mind about the damage that fuzzy dice can do. Remember that Bob can be hurt, personally. He can be feeling anger. He can be feeling hatred. He can be afraid. He can be arrogant. Each of these feelings presents its own challenges. If someone truly espouses hatred, they unfortunately, can only be talked out of it by people who agree with them. If someone has been hurt, it's best treated with sympathy. Anger and arrogance are hard to argue with. First of all, both should be dealt with alone. If an issue enrages someone you need to proceed with tact. You have to know how to calm anger, without giving ground. How do you do this? Good luck with that one. Don't insult them, don't mock them. You need to figure out why this issue makes them so angry. Some people are only angry because they're told they should be. Zack has been told that fuzzy dice causes thousands of car crashes every year and the needless suffering at the hands of people like Chuck enrages him. (This is why it's important to distance yourself from people like Chuck). Arrogance is basically the thought that you can't be wrong. Henry has gone to university for years studying the in-depth social consequences of fuzzy dice, and has written a master's thesis on it. It's arrogance because Henry won't even entertain the thought of a world where fuzzy dice aren't murderers. How do you deal with them? It depends on how arrogant they are. Sometimes you can pull their heads out of their asses with peer reviewed facts against them, but sometimes they're so arrogant they won't even read your arguments properly. The best results come from changing context. Change the medical context to the ethical context. Or in the case of fuzzy dice, change the safety context to the freedom context. It's our right to have fuzzy dice in our car and if we ban those, what's next? Step 4: Be Confident, not arrogant. Be confident, don't be arrogant. Confidence is "I can totally do this" while arrogance is "I can't possibly fail." If you need more help figuring out the difference, you're arrogant. Remember, sometimes you might have to give ground. Step 5: Listen to Bob without getting angry You have to listen to Bob, even if he supplies nothing but stock phrases (those are actually the easiest things to argue against.) If he gets confrontational, keep your cool. He'll be getting all up and arms, making himself look foolish. It takes two to fight, remember? When he's done talking, breath and then proceed. Step 6: Avoid logical/argumentative fallacies Both sides. Don't entertain them, and don't make them. You can learn what they are on wikipedia. Step 7: Try Something New Okay, time to respond. And you have to keep things simple. Direct without being accusatory. Assume that Bob has heard the pre-packaged statistics you want to spout hundreds of times. You need to say something new, something that Bob hasn't heard before. Maybe you can hit him with a personal story. You know about this guy who owns a fuzzy dice store, and if he gets them banned, he'll be forced to go out of business. Focus on the personal. If all else fails, try rewording common arguments. Step 8: Seek Compromise '''Tell Bob that he doesn't have to make fuzzy dice illegal to prevent traffic fatalities. He can teach fuzzy dice safety to new drivers, or help push limitations on fuzzy dice rather than flat out making them illegal. Compromise is not always possible. Done well, it can resolve the issue. Done poorly however, and you've created an alternative that no one likes. '''Step 9: In Self-Interest If you know why this person is interested in this issue, you can target that. Sometimes it's possible, like helping Bob maybe grieve, or once again, push safety standards. Sometimes it's not so easy. If the fuzzy dice salesman recants his position, not only does he go out of business, he may have inadvertently caused many traffic accidents. That opinion is difficult to change, nearly impossible, and it might be best not to attack from that angle. The goal is to make your side sound better than Bob's side, for the sake of Bob. Step 10: Provide a Way to Back Down Sometimes people stick to opinions strongly because they'll look like a fool if they don't, and they'll fall into ridicule. To do this, you need to give some ground, or at least some kind of agreement. Why does this work? "Side B sucks" "I'm on Side B" "Side B sucks more" "I'm still on Side B" "There's nothing good about side B!" "If I admit Side B is wrong, I do it to this arrogant, pushy prick. I need to stand my ground. He's clearly in the wrong." That's why it works. The more you demonize someone's side, the more they're likely to cling to it. Step 11: As a last resort, agree-to-disagree By not doing this, it removes chances of said person coming to your side in the future. There are less... honorable ways to change people's opinions, but I'm assuming that people reading this want to go through reasonable discourse. And remember ladies and gentlemen, fuzzy dice is a serious issue.